Primary Fraud: Bernie Would've Won Nomination
Page 1 of 1 [ 4 posts ]
Campin_Cat
Veteran
Joined: 6 May 2014
Age: 64
Gender: Female
Posts: 25,953
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.
http://m.dailykos.com/story/2016/7/29/1554022/-Election-Justice-USA-Study-Finds-that-Without-Election-Fraud-Sanders-Would-Have-Won-by-Landslide
I did a search, of this site, on this, and the only thing that comes close, was posted in March----and, since this article is dated July, I thought I'd post it.
Quote:
...we gave a date-by-date, state-by-state overview of each of these fraud or suppression types at work throughout the course of the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries. Based on this work, Election Justice USA has established an upper estimate of 184 pledged delegates lost by Senator Bernie Sanders as a consequence of specific irregularities and instances of fraud. Adding these delegates to Senator Sanders’ pledged delegate total and subtracting the same number from Hillary Clinton’s total would more than erase the 359 pledged delegate gap between the two candidates. EJUSA established the upper estimate through exit polling data, statistical analysis by precinct size, and attention to the details of Democratic proportional awarding of national delegates. Even small changes in vote shares in critical states like Massachusetts and New York could have substantially changed the media narrative surrounding the primaries in ways that would likely have had far reaching consequences for Senator Sanders’ campaign.
(Bolding and underlining, MINE.)I don't understand why more hasn't been made of this----I mean, I know Bernie said he was suing, but..... I know it won't do any good, NOW----especially, since Bernie already endorsed Hillary----but, I just thought somebody might want to read it.....
_________________
White female; age 59; diagnosed Aspie.
I use caps for emphasis----I'm NOT angry or shouting. I use caps like others use italics, underline, or bold.
"What we know is a drop; what we don't know, is an ocean." (Sir Isaac Newton)
"erase the 359 pledged delegate gap between the two candidates".
Yet, according to RCP, Clinton got 2807 delegates, and Sanders 1894 delegates.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... count.html
359 taken from Clinton, and given to Sanders, would still result in a Clinton win.
LoveNotHate wrote:
"erase the 359 pledged delegate gap between the two candidates".
Yet, according to RCP, Clinton got 2807 delegates, and Sanders 1894 delegates.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... count.html
359 taken from Clinton, and given to Sanders, would still result in a Clinton win.
Yet, according to RCP, Clinton got 2807 delegates, and Sanders 1894 delegates.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... count.html
359 taken from Clinton, and given to Sanders, would still result in a Clinton win.
You are looking at the total delegate count as opposed to pledged delegates.
We cannot know how super-delegates would have voted if Sanders had won a narrow majority of pledged delegates.
